Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (21)
- Part of a Book (1)
- Preprint (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (23)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (23)
Keywords
- breast cancer (5)
- Diagnostik (2)
- Früherkennung (2)
- Mammakarzinom (2)
- Nachsorge (2)
- Richtlinie (2)
- adjuvant therapy (2)
- adjuvante Therapie (2)
- brain metastases (2)
- clinical benefit (2)
Institute
- Medizin (23) (remove)
Background: The integration of the non-cross-resistant chemotherapeutic agents capecitabine and vinorelbine into an intensified dose-dense sequential anthracycline- and taxane-containing regimen in high-risk early breast cancer (EBC) could improve efficacy, but this combination was not examined in this context so far. Methods: Patients with stage II/IIIA EBC (four or more positive lymph nodes) received post-operative intensified dose-dense sequential epirubicin (150mg/m2 every 2 weeks) and paclitaxel (225mg/m2 every 2 weeks) with filgrastim and darbepoetin alfa, followed by capecitabine alone (dose levels 1 and 3) or with vinorelbine (dose levels 2 and 4). Capecitabine was given on days 1-14 every 21 days at 1000 or 1250 mg/m2 twice daily (dose levels 1/2 and 3/4, respectively). Vinorelbine 25 mg/m2 was given on days 1 and 8 of each 21-day course (dose levels 2 and 4). Results: Fifty-one patients were treated. There was one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) at dose level 1. At dose level 2 (capecitabine and vinorelbine), five of 10 patients experienced DLTs. Therefore evaluation of vinorelbine was abandoned and dose level 3 (capecitabine monotherapy) was expanded. Hand-foot syndrome and diarrhoea were dose limiting with capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily. At 35.2 months' median follow-up, the estimated 3-year relapse-free and overall survival rates were 82% and 91%, respectively. Administration of capecitabine monotherapy after sequential dose-dense epirubicin and paclitaxel is feasible in node-positive EBC, while the combination of capecitabine and vinorelbine as used here caused more DLTs. Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN38983527.
Introduction: Current prognostic gene expression profiles for breast cancer mainly reflect proliferation status and are most useful in ER-positive cancers. Triple negative breast cancers (TNBC) are clinically heterogeneous and prognostic markers and biology-based therapies are needed to better treat this disease.
Methods: We assembled Affymetrix gene expression data for 579 TNBC and performed unsupervised analysis to define metagenes that distinguish molecular subsets within TNBC. We used n = 394 cases for discovery and n = 185 cases for validation. Sixteen metagenes emerged that identified basal-like, apocrine and claudin-low molecular subtypes, or reflected various non-neoplastic cell populations, including immune cells, blood, adipocytes, stroma, angiogenesis and inflammation within the cancer. The expressions of these metagenes were correlated with survival and multivariate analysis was performed, including routine clinical and pathological variables.
Results: Seventy-three percent of TNBC displayed basal-like molecular subtype that correlated with high histological grade and younger age. Survival of basal-like TNBC was not different from non basal-like TNBC. High expression of immune cell metagenes was associated with good and high expression of inflammation and angiogenesis-related metagenes were associated with poor prognosis. A ratio of high B-cell and low IL-8 metagenes identified 32% of TNBC with good prognosis (hazard ratio (HR) 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61; P < 0.001) and was the only significant predictor in multivariate analysis including routine clinicopathological variables.
Conclusions: We describe a ratio of high B-cell presence and low IL-8 activity as a powerful new prognostic marker for TNBC. Inhibition of the IL-8 pathway also represents an attractive novel therapeutic target for this disease.
Background: Current prognostic gene signatures for breast cancer mainly reflect proliferation status and have limited value in triple-negative (TNBC) cancers. The identification of prognostic signatures from TNBC cohorts was limited in the past due to small sample sizes.
Methodology/Principal Findings: We assembled all currently publically available TNBC gene expression datasets generated on Affymetrix gene chips. Inter-laboratory variation was minimized by filtering methods for both samples and genes. Supervised analysis was performed to identify prognostic signatures from 394 cases which were subsequently tested on an independent validation cohort (n = 261 cases).
Conclusions/Significance: Using two distinct false discovery rate thresholds, 25% and <3.5%, a larger (n = 264 probesets) and a smaller (n = 26 probesets) prognostic gene sets were identified and used as prognostic predictors. Most of these genes were positively associated with poor prognosis and correlated to metagenes for inflammation and angiogenesis. No correlation to other previously published prognostic signatures (recurrence score, genomic grade index, 70-gene signature, wound response signature, 7-gene immune response module, stroma derived prognostic predictor, and a medullary like signature) was observed. In multivariate analyses in the validation cohort the two signatures showed hazard ratios of 4.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.71–9.48; P = 0.001) and 4.08 (95% CI 1.79–9.28; P = 0.001), respectively. The 10-year event-free survival was 70% for the good risk and 20% for the high risk group. The 26-gene signatures had modest predictive value (AUC = 0.588) to predict response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy, however, the combination of a B-cell metagene with the prognostic signatures increased its response predictive value. We identified a 264-gene prognostic signature for TNBC which is unrelated to previously known prognostic signatures.
Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a neurodegenerative disorder frequent at old age characterized by atrophy of the nigrostriatal projection. Overexpression and A53T-mutation of the presynaptic, vesicle-associated chaperone alpha-synuclein are known to cause early-onset autosomal dominant PD. We previously generated mice with transgenic overexpression of human A53T-alpha-synuclein (A53T-SNCA) in dopaminergic substantia nigra neurons as a model of early PD. To elucidate the early and late effects of A53T-alpha-synuclein on the proteome of dopaminergic nerve terminals in the striatum, we now investigated expression profiles of young and old mice using two-dimensional fluorescence difference in gel electrophoresis (2D-DIGE) and mass spectrometry. In total, 15 proteins were upregulated and 2 downregulated. Mice before the onset of motor anomalies showed an upregulation of the spot containing 14-3-3 proteins, in particular the epsilon isoform, as well as altered levels of chaperones, vesicle trafficking and bioenergetics proteins. In old mice, the persistent upregulation of 14-3-3 proteins was aggravated by an increase of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) suggesting astrogliosis due to initial neurodegeneration. Independent immunoblots corroborated GFAP upregulation and 14-3-3 upregulation for the epsilon isoform, and also detected significant eta and gamma changes. Only for 14-3-3 epsilon a corresponding mRNA increase was observed in midbrain, suggesting it is transcribed in dopaminergic perikarya and accumulates as protein in presynapses, together with A53T-SNCA. 14-3-3 proteins associate with alpha-synuclein in vitro and in pathognomonic Lewy bodies of PD brains. They act as chaperones in signaling, dopamine synthesis and stress response. Thus, their early dysregulation probably reflects a response to alpha-synuclein toxicity.
Electronic supplementary material: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00702-011-0717-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Introduction: We examined if a combination of proliferation markers and estrogen receptor (ER) activity could predict early versus late relapses in ER-positive breast cancer and inform the choice and length of adjuvant endocrine therapy.
Methods: Baseline affymetrix gene-expression profiles from ER-positive patients who received no systemic therapy (n = 559), adjuvant tamoxifen for 5 years (cohort-1: n = 683, cohort-2: n = 282) and from 58 patients treated with neoadjuvant letrozole for 3 months (gene-expression available at baseline, 14 and 90 days) were analyzed. A proliferation score based on the expression of mitotic kinases (MKS) and an ER-related score (ERS) adopted from Oncotype DX® were calculated. The same analysis was performed using the Genomic Grade Index as proliferation marker and the luminal gene score from the PAM50 classifier as measure of estrogen-related genes. Median values were used to define low and high marker groups and four combinations were created. Relapses were grouped into time cohorts of 0-2.5, 0-5, 5-10 years.
Results: In the overall 10 years period, the proportional hazards assumption was violated for several biomarker groups indicating time-dependent effects. In tamoxifen-treated patients Low-MKS/Low-ERS cancers had continuously increasing risk of relapse that was higher after 5 years than Low-MKS/High-ERS cancers [0 to 10 year, HR 3.36; p = 0.013]. High-MKS/High-ERS cancers had low risk of early relapse [0-2.5 years HR 0.13; p = 0.0006], but high risk of late relapse which was higher than in the High-MKS/Low-ERS group [after 5 years HR 3.86; p = 0.007]. The High-MKS/Low-ERS subset had most of the early relapses [0 to 2.5 years, HR 6.53; p < 0.0001] especially in node negative tumors and showed minimal response to neoadjuvant letrozole. These findings were qualitatively confirmed in a smaller independent cohort of tamoxifen-treated patients. Using different biomarkers provided similar results.
Conclusions: Early relapses are highest in highly proliferative/low-ERS cancers, in particular in node negative tumors. Relapses occurring after 5 years of adjuvant tamoxifen are highest among the highly-proliferative/high-ERS tumors although their risk of recurrence is modest in the first 5 years on tamoxifen. These tumors could be the best candidates for extended endocrine therapy.
Heterogenous subtypes of breast cancer need to be analyzed separately. Pooling of datasets can provide reasonable sample sizes but dataset bias is an important concern. We assembled a combined dataset of 579 Affymetrix microarrays from triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) series GSE31519. We developed a method for selecting comparable datasets and to control for the amount of dataset bias of individual probesets.
Purpose: The PELICAN trial evaluates for the first time efficacy and safety of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) versus capecitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC).
Methods: This randomized, phase III, open-label, multicenter trial enrolled first-line MBC patients who were ineligible for endocrine or trastuzumab therapy. Cumulative adjuvant anthracyclines of 360 mg/m2 doxorubicin or equivalent were allowed. Left ventricular ejection fraction of >50 % was required. Patients received PLD 50 mg/m2 every 28 days or capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 twice daily for 14 days every 21 days. The primary endpoint was time-to-disease progression (TTP).
Results: 210 patients were randomized (n = 105, PLD and n = 105, capecitabine). Adjuvant anthracyclines were given to 37 % (PLD) and 36 % (capecitabine) of patients. No significant difference was observed in TTP [HR = 1.21 (95 % confidence interval, 0.838–1.750)]. Median TTP was 6.0 months for both PLD and capecitabine. Comparing patients with or without prior anthracyclines, no significant difference in TTP was observed in the PLD arm (log-rank P = 0.64). For PLD versus capecitabine, respectively, overall survival (median, 23.3 months vs. 26.8 months) and time-to-treatment failure (median, 4.6 months vs. 3.7 months) were not statistically significantly different. Compared to PLD, patients on capecitabine experienced more serious adverse events (P = 0.015) and more cardiac events among patients who had prior anthracycline exposure (18 vs. 8 %; P = 0.31).
Conclusion: Both PLD and capecitabine are effective first-line agents for MBC.
Bestimmung des klinischen Nutzens systemischer adjuvanter Therapien beim frühen Mammakarzinom
(2017)
Die onkologische Therapie befindet sich im Umbruch. Hohe Erwartungen sind mit einer Reihe innovativer zielgerichteter Medikamente verknüpft, die sich derzeit in der klinischen Entwicklung befinden. Vor diesem Hintergrund erfahren Diskussionen um die Begriffe klinischer Nutzen oder klinische Relevanz neue Aktualität. Dies gilt auch für die Weiterentwicklungen der adjuvanten systemischen Therapie des frühen Mammakarzinoms. In Anbetracht der kurativen Zielsetzung erfolgt die Beurteilung des klinischen Nutzens einer adjuvanten Therapie maßgeblich anhand von Wirksamkeitsendpunkten. Der Fokus liegt hierbei auf Verbesserungen des krankheitsfreien Überlebens und des Rezidivrisikos. Eine Aussage zum Gesamtüberleben ist aufgrund der heute erreichten niedrigen Mortalitätsraten erst nach sehr langen Beobachtungszeiten möglich. Folgerichtig sollte neuen Medikamenten für die adjuvante Therapie ein klinischer Nutzen zugesprochen werden, wenn sie eine weitere Reduktion des Rezidivrisikos über den heutigen hohen Standard hinaus ermöglichen. Die Evidenz für etablierte adjuvante Therapiestandards beim frühen Mammakarzinom kann als objektiver Maßstab zum Vergleich herangezogen werden. Am Beispiel der adjuvanten endokrinen Therapie, der adjuvanten Polychemotherapie und der adjuvanten Anti-HER2-Therapie werden in diesem Übersichtsartikel die Anforderungen für den klinischen Nutzen neuer adjuvanter Therapien beim frühen Mammakarzinom abgeleitet.
Oncologic therapy is currently undergoing significant changes. A number of innovative targeted medications currently in clinical development have raised high expectations. With that in mind, discussions about terms such as "clinical benefit" and "clinical relevance" are highly topical. This also applies to further developments in the field of adjuvant systemic therapies for early-stage breast cancer. As the treatment aim is curative, assessment of the clinical benefit of adjuvant therapies must be largely based on efficacy outcomes. The focus must be on improving disease-free survival rates and lowering the risk of recurrence. Because of the current low mortality rates, statements about overall survival rates are only possible after very long observation periods. Consequently, new drugs in adjuvant therapies should be considered as offering a clinical benefit, if they reduce the risk of recurrence below current low levels of risk. The evidence for established adjuvant therapy standards in early-stage breast cancer can be used as objective criteria for comparison. This review article considers the requirements for clinical benefit of new adjuvant therapies for early breast cancer, based on examples from adjuvant endocrine therapy, adjuvant polychemotherapy and adjuvant anti-HER2 therapy.
Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6 inhibitors have shown great results in numerous clinical trials and have improved the clinical outcome for patients with hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer significantly. To date, three CDK4/6 inhibitors are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA): palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib; the first two compounds are aproved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) as well. In combination with endocrine therapy, all of them led to significantly improved progression-free survival compared with endocrine therapy alone. The aim of this article is to give an overview of the efficacy data and to describe the CDK4/6 inhibitor-based treatment-associated adverse events, including hematological and nonhematological adverse events. In addition, it describes the corrrect approach to patient monitoring and adverse event mangement and summarizes the current recommendations for dose reductions and dose interruptions regarding the key adverse events, such as neutropenia, diarrhea, QTc prolongation and hepatobiliary toxicity. Accurate patient monitoring and management of the side effects is crucial, as several clinical trials in early breast cancer are in progress and may lead to an additional approval in the neo-/adjuvant setting.